Semiautomatic: Not Necessarily A Disadvantage

8/7/2019 Semiautomatic: Not Necessarily A Disadvantage

1/9


2/9

in the hands of all infantrymen should be vigorously combated. Inperimeter defense, the time almost invariably comes when theautomatic weapons run short of ammunition, with the local issue stillto be decided. This is the crisis of the contest, when decision mayswing either way, depending on which side is most, capable ofdelivering the last few volleys.

The semi-automatic weapons are conservers of ammunition.Apart from their great value in the hands of a good marksman at anystage of the fight, they compose the weapons reserve whichbecomes of inestimable value in the last hours when both sides arenear the point of exhaustion. In the infantry company data fromKorean operations there are numerous examples wherein theretention of the position depended finally on fire from the M1, and rifle

fire finally decided the issue. The troops who carry the weaponalmost unanimously recognize the vital importance of this factor. Onthe basis of their experience, they would not concur in any suggestionthat the line could be strengthened by fitting it exclusively with full-automatic power.

The semiautomatic M1 Garand holds the line in Korea.

S.L.A.M. noted there were virtually no occasions in which theM1 Garands ran completely out of ammunition, even when thecarbines, BARs and machine guns had shot their wads entirely. Healso claimed that at least 50% of the North Korean and Red Chinesecasualties came from small arms, since the Communists quicklyadopted the tactic of hugging the belt, i.e. closing with UN forces tosuch short ranges that artillery and air strikes could not be used due
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oRCvs1fcXkE/TY4e_tA9NXI/AAAAAAAABlA/3I6ZGEXXFgg/s1600/blog%2Bm1%2Bkorea.jpg


3/9

to the proximity of friendly forces and the danger of friendly firecasualties. The VC/NVA were also to use this tactic, often effectively,in the Vietnam War to help negate the overwhelming firepoweradvantage of the American military.

As an aside, while the assault rifle crowd quickly grabbed ontoSLAMs 300-yard figure for all the range thats necessary for theinfantrymans rifle, they ignored his firm opinions about not needing afull-auto rifle and that the M1 could indeed be effective well past 300yards if the men were given increased live-fire training.

Full auto fire is especially futile when it comes to the full-powerbig-bore battle rifles. While a magnificent battle rifle, it was quicklyseen that the full-auto capability on the M14 was nothing but a waste

of ammunition and in American service the weapon was soonchanged to semi-auto only. With the FAL, the sheer uncontrollabilityof fully-automatic fire led the British and former CommonwealthnationsAustralia, Canada, India, New Zealandto adopt semi-automatic only weapons, the so-called Inch Pattern FAL, L1A1, orSLR (Self Loading Rifle).

This did not appear to handicap the infantry units effectivenesswhen armed with these semi-auto rifles and in fact served to enhanceindividual marksmanship.

One former British infantryman summed things up well: Thereason as to why the British forces did away with auto fire on theirSLR is because it was bloody pointless; if you have ever shot anAK47 then you will know that on auto they shoot up into the air. TheSLR would have done pretty much the same! A waste of ammo andtax payers money

Some estimates claim that American troops in Vietnam, oncearmed with the full-auto M16, expended around 200,000 rounds ofsmall arms ammunition per enemy casualty. For Aussies of the well-trained Royal Australian Regiment, armed with the semi-auto SLR,275 rounds were expended per enemy casualty. This while theAussies looked down on body counts as a measure of success, andtended not to extrapolate their body counts to please the brass hats.


4/9

The Australian method of fighting involved small, professionaland very stealthy patrols in which they usually got the jump on theenemy. For instance, over a third of the Australians enemy contactswere ambushes. In 34% of the cases, the Aussies ambushed theVC/NVA while in only 2% of the contacts did the enemy manage tosurprise the Australians in their own ambushes. Aussies initiatedcontact with the VC/NVA over 75% of the time while it was theVC/NVA who initiated contact against American forces 80% of thetime.

One SAS study of Australian actions in Vietnam claimed that,despite the usually quite timely and relatively heavy air strikes andartillery support the infantry enjoyed in that war, some 70% of enemycasualties were inflicted with infantry small arms...and the majority of

those small arms were semi-auto SLRs.

A continent away, Rhodesian Security Forces fightingCommunist terrorists who usually always greatly out-numbered themdeigned the use of full-automatic on their South African manufacturedR1 FALs.

Rhodesian troopies used aimed single shots or double-taps to break up Communist ambushes.

Like most of the Rhodesian Security Forces, the change leveron my FN was set for semi-auto only. I had the option of having thischanged to include full-auto, but decided against it. Through practice,I could put down a devastating barrage of accurate semi-automaticfire that just could not be matched on full auto. I have never hadmuch faith in full automatic fire capability in a full bore battle rifle,
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-V3g-NtO1ssE/TY4e_y0o99I/AAAAAAAABlI/AvBXRGSVBTM/s1600/blog%2Bsealous%2Bdrake.jpg


5/9

simply because you generally waste ammunition without hittinganything after the first shot has been fired. The recoil generated bythe powerful 7.62mm NATO round makes the gun virtually impossibleto control

Another Rhodesian veteran noted another advantage of well-aimed semi-automatic fire that most people wouldnt think of.

Terrorists generally fired on fully automatic spray and pray.This would often start high, and would rise. The indiscriminate use ofammunition on fully automatic usually meant they would run out longbefore the Rhodesian troops.

During the Falklands War, British forces were armed with semi-

automatic SLRs while the Argentineans had the equivalent MetricFAL with full-automatic capability. Much ado was made about theArgentine forces firepower advantage with their full-auto FALs, butit didnt change the course of battle.

British Paras re-zero their SLRs on the ground in theFalklands. You'd think someone deploying from 689-foot

elevation Ft. Drum, NY to the Hindu Kush would do the same,but you'd be wrong.

One British Para color sergeant didnt seem to notice a big

disadvantage with the SLRs semi-auto only action: "I picked fourblokes and got up on this high feature, and as I did so this troop oftwenty or thirty Argentines were coming towards us. We just openedfire on them. We don't know how many we killed, but they got whatthey deserved, because none of them were left standing when we'dfinished with them."
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-w3W-4qAxQKk/TY4e_TKob0I/AAAAAAAABkw/wBdVnPo_N18/s1600/image001.gif


6/9

On the other side, most (not all) Argentine troops were poorly-trained young conscripts serving (suffering?) under a frighteninglylarge number of very bad, abusive, negligent, and self-centeredofficers who sometimes vanished when the shooting started. Undersuch circumstances many an FN magazine was dumped in thegeneral direction of the enemy on full auto with negligible effect.

Proving the axiom that there are no bad soldiers, just badofficers, one Argentine infantryman recalled serving under anefficient, conscientious former commando major who trained histroops thoroughly and well. Said the veteran, I was issued with aFAL 7.62 millimetre rifle The main emphasis in shooting wasmaking every bullet count. His company was one of the few to put upfierce resistance and during the Battle of Mount Longdon, even

though they were outnumbered, they fought the British Paras almostto a standstill for 12 hours and inflicted heavy casualties.

In 1983, after the Falklands War, a unit of the 7th Gurkha Riflesconducted a joint training exercise with the American 75th ArmyRangers at Fort Lewis, Washington. The Gurkhas are a warrior race,and well known as some of the toughest light infantry on the planet;the Rangers were suitably impressed.

Unlike American forces, who believe in small-caliber, fast-

shooting semi- or full-auto rifles, Gurkha riflemen carry British-madeFN semiauto only rifles in 7.62mm NATO caliber. Their legendarysteel-clad nerves, which according to numerous reports allow them toreturn slow fire even when being shot at by automatic weapons,account for their philosophy of one kill for one shot. And thats howtheyre trainedthey make every shot count.

The Gurkhas CO said, We find that the extra weight of thelarger caliber doesnt matter with the Gurkhas, because theyre sostrong, but the increased range and killing power possible with the7.62, plus the effectiveness of aimed fire, makes them a very deadlysoldier in combat

Aimed-fire marksmanship is a continuing part of Gurkhatraining, and they are virtually all expert shots. In the self loading rifle,or SLR, class in the 1981 Bisley Championship shoot in England, the


7/9

1st Bn, 7 GR took first place in all-Army competition. They expect tofinish first in the 1983 Championships.

Things to make you go, "Oh shit!"...Gurkhas, Kukris, andSLRs, oh my.

Afghanistan, 1985: An American Army officer and analysischastised a Soviet force in Afghanistan for shooting up too muchammo on full-auto: an air assault company runs out of ammunition

in a days combat. This is partially due to the Soviet philosophy thatsmall arms fire suppresses enemy fire and eventually may kill theenemy. The West wants to kill enemy with small arms fire and usescrew-served weapons to suppress enemy fire. The standard Sovietassault rifles selector switch goes from safe to semiautomatic to fullautomatic. The West sees semiautomatic as the norm. Perhaps theSoviets needed to devote more time to rifle marksmanship for aguerrilla war. It saves on ammunition and consumption.

(Pet peeve time. I certainly never saw all this emphasis on well-aimed semi-automatic fire and marksmanship during my service timein various combat arms units.)

Fast forward to Afghanistan 2006. An American Special Forcescompany and the Afghan Army commandos they have trained moveup a ridge to take control of a dominant hill known as Sperwan Ghar
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pONCTZEprJM/TY4e_2K3dqI/AAAAAAAABlQ/03RvQ2gxy98/s1600/fal%2Bgurkha.jpg


8/9

to overlook a battlefield where insurgents and conventional infantryare slugging it in order to call in air and artillery strikes.

A group of insurgents on the top watched the soldiersapproaching. When the task force got to within a few hundred metersof the hilltop, the insurgents opened fire from three sides with RPGsand small arms. The commandos fought for 20 minutes, until theynearly ran out of ammunition. They then broke contact and movedback towards the southern edge of the valley to await resupply byhelicopter.

Examining the math, if we assume the official basic load of M4ammunition, 120 rounds, we get ten shots per minute, or one roundevery six seconds. And this does not include time spent in taking

cover, mag changes, movement, stoppages, etc. The unofficial figureI hear bandied about the most for ammo loads in Afghanistan is moreoften 600 rounds, which would amount to one shot every twoseconds.

The report, BTW, did not mention casualties for either side,even though Im willing to bet the Taliban expended a helluva lotmore ammunition than the friendlies did. So much for criticizing theRussians looking at this example of the Wests skill in marksmanshipand semi-auto fire, even by elite troops.

For the small group or even larger military units in roughcountry, fully-automatic rifles can actually be a liability when it comesto ammunition conservation and re-supply. As SLAM noted, full-autofirepower poured out early in the fight can easily leave you suckinghind tit and reaching for the bayonet or E-tool when the action comesto a head. Not even modern Western armies can always count onfresh ammunition being only a radio call away when it comes tomountainous country, thick rain forests, bad weather, or intenseenemy fire on helicopter LZs.

So dont feel too bad about having only a semi-automatic rifle.As Douglas Bell said, At 600 rounds per minute, how many minutescan you carry?


9/9

http://www.benandbawbsblog.blogspot.com/

Documents

Semiautomatic: Not Necessarily A Disadvantage